About your Search

20130201
20130228
Search Results 0 to 38 of about 39 (some duplicates have been removed)
supplied to the rebels. the concern president obama had lying weapons would in effect be involved in a proxy war supported by iran and russia. the other side of the debate is nothing else is working and we need to create pressure on assad and build relationship with people inside syria who might take over one day. another factor is there are rebels, al-qaeda affiliated rebels the united states and the west doesn't support. and i don't think it's in the west's interest to see them end up at the top of the heap. >> rose: and then we turn to the story of the chinese army spying on the american government and american companies with david sanger of the "new york times," dune lawrence and michael riley of bloomberg businessweek. >> the cyber has been off to the side as something of an annoyance. i'm hearing this has gotten so big it's moving to the center of the relationship and it risks the rest of the relationship. i think the next thing you're going to see the president sending some kind of envoy to beijing to make that point. >> rose: the conflict in syria and spying on the unite
. anyway it came to the attention of the whitehouse, it was discussed president obama decided against it at the time and others who counseled against the proposal including vice president biden, tom dawn lynn who was recently a your show the national security advisor and susan rice. those are kind of the two camps, the whitehouse against the rest of the government as it existed at that time. but now we have a new national security team. >> rose: where was dennis mcdough know. >> i don't know where he was for a fact but i know dennis was very close to president obama. and i would probably put him in the camp of those being cautious about getting more deeply involved in the crises. and i think the argument would have lined up this way. on the side of caution, you know, you would be getting more deeply involved. and i think the concern president obama had was by supplying weapons would be in effect involved in a approximately war against a regime supported by iran and russia. on the other side of the debate the argument was well nothing else is working and we need to increase the press
that the strategic, one of the strategic principleses that the president and the obama administration brought at the outset of our first term is that with constructive and productive great power relationships you can get a lot done in the world. and if they go off the track it is much more difficult and frankly we've seen it, that proposition that you just laid out has been proven i think in the context where. there has been cooperation, we have gotten a lot done with great power of corporate raise and we can talk about that in terms of iran and other places in afghanistan. on the reset. you asked a question directly. he did the reset work. in the first term if you look at the list of things you are able to accomplish. we have had a change of leadership in russia. we will get that in a secretary. we have been able to accomplish, really, through great power negotiation, and great power, productive and constructive relationship, we have a new start treaty in the arms control area which will -- >> what's the status of that. >> the status this. the status it has gone into effect and is being impl
or an idealist realist and you need both. >> rose: here's the headline. for a second term, idealistic obama returns. >> well, what i believe is this, foreign policy is like a hot air balloon. you need the helium of ideal schism-to-get it up and you need the ballast of realism to give it a direction. i that's why ihit's a false dichotomy, you need both. >> rose: we may face sequester, what will it do to america's ability to conduct a wise foreign policy and defense policy? >> i think it will hurt us immensely. clearly in defense there are already questions as to, as i understand it, general dempsey spoke about in in terms of moving an aircraft carrier from one part of the world to another or how we have readiness. in foreign policy i can tell you the foreign policy budget of the united states is setnglike $50 billion, not that much in the overall comparison. yet it is needed not only to run our'm be sis and pay our ambassadors but also for program is be insfwauns paw eyre policy which other countries behave. foreign policy is about trying to get people to change their behavior and sometimes
, but with washington we just had an election. >> yeah. >> rose: president obama re-elected. we see now some movement towards immigration reform. >> yeah. >> rose: because elections have results. >> yeah. >> and they realize the latino population have shown their electoral strength is that where change is going to come from? because politicians finally began notwithstanding the corporate power that you mentiod, and tnited decision by the supreme court, all of the things you referenced, that we have some possibility of regaining because elections have results and people see the-- and they want to come back to washington. and if, in fact, there are changes in the dem graphics of this country, we may have changes in policy. >> yeah. in the election last november the latino or hispanic community gave the republican party infra ocular trauma. and they realized that they will go extinct as a political party if they don't make the changes. and so no, it's very clear, what's happening. now i welcome it, i think it's great. and i think that president obama gave a terrific inaugural address. i was so pleased b
Search Results 0 to 38 of about 39 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (31 Dec 2014)